Re: [PATCH 3/7] shared subtree

[Miklos Szeredi]

> yes we agreed on returning EINVAL when a directory is attempted to made
> shared/private/slave/unclonnable.   But this is a different case.
> 
> lets say  /mnt is a mountpoint having a vfsmount (say A). 
> now if you run 
> 	mount --bind /mnt/a  /tmp
> this operation succeeds currently. 
> 
> now lets say /mnt is a mountpoint having a vfsmount which is shared.
> now if you run
> 	mount --bind /mnt/a /tmp
> 
> we now have a mount at /tmp which gets propogation from mounts under
> /mnt/a. right?

Yes.

> but /mnt/a is not a mountpoint at all.  if we need to track and
> propogate mounts/unmounts under /tmp or /mnt/a we need to have a mount
> at /mnt/a.

I don't think we do.  You can just check at propagation time if the
propagated mountpoint is visible in the destination mount or not.
Just like --rbind checks whether children mounts are below or above
the to-be-bound directory.

Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/